I am Australian (but also er, Brit-ish) and all I associate with the name 'India' is Gone with the Wind, there is a character with that name. I guess for some of us we seperate the name from the place. I have been to Florence, it is a beautiful place, but I don't think of it when I meet someone called 'Florence', used as a name I am reminded of a P G Wodehouse character and the singer...

I've never discussed the name India with my partner, but probably because he is of Indian extraction and the thought of a little half Indian girl called India weirds me out, I guess it could be a statement of patriotism but he's er, pretty removed from the mother land. It is a white name and it has colonial connotations that many would not know and/or care about. Some will however but this is contextual and cultural.

I say contextual because I've noticed many berries feel Jemima shouldn't be used as a name (it was alluded to in the other India thread). With my background Jemima is a (puddle) duck from a beloved childhood story, a girl from the Bible and a doll from a children's TV show...I am shocked that in the States I would be branded a racist for calling my child that, I don't know about your pancake brand ad campaigns! I realise that ad campaigns and history are not the same thing but it is also fair to say that many are not aware of the history...or the offence that some people may take to what is essentially a place name.

I guess my point is that people have different contexts, but there is enough real racism in the world before jumping to conclusions over this sort of thing (a few weeks ago someone senior to me decided to have a joke about how Australian Aboriginal people look like monkeys and laughed at me when I looked horrified/repulsed/enraged)...I guess I pick my battles.

However, if you go on a global forum and ask all the people on it what they think of a name there are likely to be a few who don't and they may have stronger or weaker reasons for this and you need to be prepared for that I guess.

Okay, not meaning to greatly offend anyone but I don't think I really get the argument. 'You can't use India because it's a country and people died there'- is that what we're getting at? Then that's true for every other place name out there, especially other 'controversial' ones. Israel- decades of strife between the Jewish and Arab people. Jordan- Middle east is a very controversial area at the moment. Britain, London- around 50,000 people were murdered in the Blitz. How about Ireland? The UK has had a very troubled history with the Irish but Ireland seems to be a trendy name accessory these days, especially in the US. Or, even more controversial- Ira! I've had relatives die in the war -in the Middle East- and I couldn't care less if someone from another country chose to name their kid Britain, Britton, Brittany, London, Israel or Jordan. And Britain was the evil, murderous occupier yet India is the controversial name? It just doesn't make sense :/